Scottish Independence

Doncor

Why do we actually speak about it? This is not our business, SCOTTISH PEOPLE SHOULD TAKE CARE OF IT!

A Dub in Glasgo

Actually, it is the residents of Scotland who will take care of it and others will seek to influence it

Scofflaw

Doncor wrote: »

Why do we actually speak about it? This is not our business, SCOTTISH PEOPLE SHOULD TAKE CARE OF IT!

Because it's politics.

cordially,
Scofflaw

First Up

Doncor wrote: »

Why do we actually speak about it? This is not our business, SCOTTISH PEOPLE SHOULD TAKE CARE OF IT!

Of course they should. It's just that we all like Scotland and the Scots and we would hate to see them do anything silly.

dlouth15

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well, on the basis that the continuator state has the rights of its predecessor, and that the (R)UK is 99.99999% certain to be recognised as that legal successor, while Scotland will not be. The (R)UK will be keeping the UK's UN Security Council seat, and its EU membership, Scotland will not be.

Whatever the certainty of it, nevertheless and in a strict legal sense, the new rUK will not be an automatic member of the EU according to your view that the entity that was the UK will have been dissolved. It will be up to the member states of the EU to recognise it as the successor state of the former UK.

First Up

dlouth15 wrote: »

Whatever the certainty of it, nevertheless and in a strict legal sense, the new rUK will not be an automatic member of the EU according to your view that the entity that was the UK will have been dissolved. It will be up to the member states of the EU to recognise it as the successor state of the former UK.

Where did you get the idea the UK would be dissolved?

This really is getting ridiculous.

dlouth15

First Up wrote: »

Where did you get the idea the UK would be dissolved?

This really is getting ridiculous.

I'm not personally saying that I 100% agree with it but Scofflaw said earlier:

Only geographically. The "Great Britain" in the name of the UK is actually the united kingdom formed by the union of the Scottish and English crowns in 1707. Scottish independence consists of 'dividing' the crowns again, making England and Scotland separate kingdoms as they were before the Act of Union.

That division means there is no united kingdom of Great Britain any more. That entity ceases to exist, and that is the entity that forms part of the UK's name.

In subsequent posts he's said that in practice this is likely not to be a problem as countries such as the EU member states are likely to regard the rUK as the continuator state.

I've no particular problem with any of that however I want to be clear that he agrees that in a strictly legal sense, the new rUK doesn't automatically join the EU. It depends on agreement of the other countries.

Scofflaw

dlouth15 wrote: »

Whatever the certainty of it, nevertheless and in a strict legal sense, the new rUK will not be an automatic member of the EU according to your view that the entity that was the UK will have been dissolved. It will be up to the member states of the EU to recognise it as the successor state of the former UK.

At the end of the day, the settlement of such matters is an extra-legal process. There is an international treaty on the succession of states, but it has only a few signatories. The process is political, not juridical.

If the other EU Member States recognise the (R)UK as the continuator of the UK, then the (R)UK remains a member of the EU. Not "becomes", because the UK is seen as continuing.

The dissolution of Great Britain does not imply the dissolution of the UK, but only of a constituent part of it - which, as we have seen, the other nations have chosen to regard as an internal UK constitutional matter.

The UK is an automatic member of the EU, or rather remains one, and the UK has not been dissolved, as long as that's what other nations accept.

So, yes to the fact that the process is political rather than legal, no to the idea that (R)UK would have any difficulty in being seen as the continuation of the current UK, and thus no to the idea that there are any even remotely probable difficulties in the UK remaining an EU member state.

Apologies if this is a little convoluted, but the current UK is the result of two different acts of union, ((E+S)+I), where (E+S) = GB. Unpicking the internal arrangements in the UK will be quite complicated for the (R)UK, and relatively simple for Scotland, whereas their external arrangements will be the reverse.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Godge

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well, on the basis that the continuator state has the rights of its predecessor, and that the (R)UK is 99.99999% certain to be recognised as that legal successor, while Scotland will not be. The (R)UK will be keeping the UK's UN Security Council seat, and its EU membership, Scotland will not be.

And without intending any offence, I think it really is wishful thinking to believe something else will happen. If the Scottish vote Yes, they have to do so while recognising that reality. If I were still in Scotland, I would recognise that reality - but I would vote Yes anyway.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scotland is voting to leave the UK, not voting to throw England, Wales and Northern Ireland out of the UK. The rest of the UK have agreed to let Scotland have a vote to leave the UK and to facilitate Scotland leaving the UK if the vote is yes.

On that basis, your estimate that the rUK is 99.99999% certain to be recognised as the legal successor looks like an underestimate:D

Scofflaw

Godge wrote: »

Scotland is voting to leave the UK, not voting to throw England, Wales and Northern Ireland out of the UK. The rest of the UK have agreed to let Scotland have a vote to leave the UK and to facilitate Scotland leaving the UK if the vote is yes.

On that basis, your estimate that the rUK is 99.99999% certain to be recognised as the legal successor looks like an underestimate:D

I was going to add more nines - in fact, I did - but it just seemed silly. At the end of the day, I would go with the (R)UK encountering a roadblock in maybe 1 in a million alternate universes. And really more of a speed bump than a roadblock, even there.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Iwasfrozen

Godge wrote: »

Scotland is voting to leave the UK, not voting to throw England, Wales and Northern Ireland out of the UK. The rest of the UK have agreed to let Scotland have a vote to leave the UK and to facilitate Scotland leaving the UK if the vote is yes.

On that basis, your estimate that the rUK is 99.99999% certain to be recognised as the legal successor looks like an underestimate:D

The United Kingdom will keep its Security Council seat. Russia is a precedent.

First Up

Scofflaw wrote: »

At the end of the day, the settlement of such matters is an extra-legal process. There is an international treaty on the succession of states, but it has only a few signatories. The process is political, not juridical.

If the other EU Member States recognise the (R)UK as the continuator of the UK, then the (R)UK remains a member of the EU. Not "becomes", because the UK is seen as continuing.

The dissolution of Great Britain does not imply the dissolution of the UK, but only of a constituent part of it - which, as we have seen, the other nations have chosen to regard as an internal UK constitutional matter.

The UK is an automatic member of the EU, or rather remains one, and the UK has not been dissolved, as long as that's what other nations accept.

So, yes to the fact that the process is political rather than legal, no to the idea that (R)UK would have any difficulty in being seen as the continuation of the current UK, and thus no to the idea that there are any even remotely probable difficulties in the UK remaining an
EU member state.

Apologies if this is a little convoluted, but the current UK is the result of two different acts of union, ((E+S)+I), where (E+S) = GB. Unpicking the internal arrangements in the UK will be quite complicated for the (R)UK, and relatively simple for Scotland, whereas their external arrangements will be the reverse.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I admire your patience in the face of severe provocation.

Fratton Fred

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Actually, it is the residents of Scotland who will take care of it and others will seek to influence it

I find this quite an odd way of doing it to be honest. It's like me getting a vote in an Irish referendum on rejoining the UK.

sfakiaman

Scofflaw wrote: »

Only geographically. The "Great Britain" in the name of the UK is actually the united kingdom formed by the union of the Scottish and English crowns in 1707. Scottish independence consists of 'dividing' the crowns again, making England and Scotland separate kingdoms as they were before the Act of Union.

On a point of information, the Union of Parliaments was in 1707, the Union of Crowns was in 1603 when James 1st of Scotland became James the Sixth and First.

sfakiaman

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I find this quite an odd way of doing it to be honest. It's like me getting a vote in an Irish referendum on rejoining the UK.

Its called democracy, anyone of voting age who has been resident in Scotland for three or more years can vote. Interestingly Ireland had a referendum in the eighties on whether UK citizens resident in Eire should be allowed to vote in elections here. Foreign nationals were not allowed to vote but it passed anyway.

I'm sure there are Pro's and Con's but would imagine the permanent residents of a country would vote according to their view of the best interests of the country.

sfakiaman

First Up wrote: »

Saw that and it is complete nonsense.

Scotland is seeking to become an independent country, not a regional self government within the UK. If it becomes independent, it ceases to be part of the UK in any shape, form or structure. The UK would be under no obligation to present Scotland as anything; Scotland would be paddling its own canoe.

The referendum is 18th September this year, and the planned independence day is 24th March 2016. I'm no legal expert but it would seem that during the time between 18/9/14 and 24/3/16 Scotland would still be a regional self governing country within the UK. So the article may not be nonsense.

Fratton Fred

sfakiaman wrote: »

Its called democracy, anyone of voting age who has been resident in Scotland for three or more years can vote. Interestingly Ireland had a referendum in the eighties on whether UK citizens resident in Eire should be allowed to vote in elections here. Foreign nationals were not allowed to vote but it passed anyway.

I'm sure there are Pro's and Con's but would imagine the permanent residents of a country would vote according to their view of the best interests of the country.

Are you implying that it is undemocratic that non Irish citizens who are resident in Ireland, can not vote in referendums here then?

sfakiaman

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Are you implying that it is undemocratic that non Irish citizens who are resident in Ireland, can not vote in referendums here then?

Any resident of Ireland can apply for citizenship so they are not specifically disenfranchised. At present no one can take out Scottish citizenship so the situation is quite different.

Scofflaw

sfakiaman wrote: »

On a point of information, the Union of Parliaments was in 1707, the Union of Crowns was in 1603 when James 1st of Scotland became James the Sixth and First.

That's true, although the crowns weren't actually unified at the Union of Crowns - all that actually happened was there were two crowns simultaneously on the same head. That is, the crowns were only 'unified' in the sense of being vested in the same person - James went on being directly King of Scotland on the one hand as one legal entity, and King of England directly as a different legal entity. Only in 1707 were the two crowns or monarchies made into a single crown or monarchy.

cordially,
Scofflaw

sfakiaman

Interesting comment from the leader of the Scottish Labour Party. I think she was only talking about her own party.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBH55ZeZU4w

First Up

sfakiaman wrote: »

The referendum is 18th September this year, and the planned independence day is 24th March 2016. I'm no legal expert but it would seem that during the time between 18/9/14 and 24/3/16 Scotland would still be a regional self governing country within the UK. So the article may not be nonsense.

The letter inferred that Scotland would be able to become an EU member in it's own right on foot of being an autonomous region of the UK, which is nonsense.

on the river

Gives opinion of scotish people

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1l3F6n8i-A

A Dub in Glasgo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I find this quite an odd way of doing it to be honest. It's like me getting a vote in an Irish referendum on rejoining the UK.

I forgot it is not all residents - criteria outined in the link below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014#Date_and_eligibility

Fratton Fred

sfakiaman wrote: »

Any resident of Ireland can apply for citizenship so they are not specifically disenfranchised. At present no one can take out Scottish citizenship so the situation is quite different.

Clutching at straws there. Any resident of Scotland can apply for British citizenship, residence in Scotland would make them eligible to vote. I don't see why citizens of other eu or commonwealth countries should get a say.

sfakiaman

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I find this quite an odd way of doing it to be honest. It's like me getting a vote in an Irish referendum on rejoining the UK.

I should have mentioned this in my earlier post, assuming you are English and living in Sarf Dublin you would be entitled to vote on reunification with the UK.

Good luck campaigning on that one.

Fratton Fred

sfakiaman wrote: »

I should have mentioned this in my earlier post, assuming you are English and living in Sarf Dublin you would be entitled to vote on reunification with the UK.

Good luck campaigning on that one.

I can't vote in Irish referendums or presidential elections.

sfakiaman

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I can't vote in Irish referendums or presidential elections.

I stand corrected, I thought you could. To be honest you haven't missed out on much!

From the Citizens Advice website

The right to vote is as follows:

Irish citizens may vote at every election and referendum;
British citizens may vote at Dáil elections, European elections and local elections;
Other European Union (EU) citizens may vote at European and local elections*
Non-EU citizens may vote at local elections only.

M04R numb3R5

I read a while ago that the Orkney and Shetland islands might not break away with Scotland, where would that leave them?

on the river

M04R numb3R5 wrote: »

I read a while ago that the Orkney and Shetland islands might not break away with Scotland, where would that leave them?

isolated geogrically and economically. but i suppose no one really cares about them.

Fratton Fred

on the river wrote: »

isolated geogrically and economically. but i suppose no one really cares about them.

Salmond might, they have oil.